Headlines that signal that the story will be misleading and/or stupid

[Meadmaker]

As the internet takes over the news biz, and the traditional media fall by the wayside, the headlines just get dumber. Providers have figured out that only certain folks read their stories, so they write headlines that will attract the Right Sort of People. Sometimes, it's just click-baity stuff with teaser headlines. Things like "Scientists Make Amazing Discovery That Might Keep You Alive If You Read This Article". Those aren't what I'm really talking about, although those can be pretty annoying, too.

I'm more talking about ones like, "Political Party You Hate Does Something Stupid." or "Experts Say That Someone You Don't Like is a Dumbass".

You just know that, whatever happened, it's not worth reading. Maybe if a whole lot of sources are covering the same topic, it might be, but when it's all alone, you just know that someone at a web site, or a traditional media outlet that has been pretty much reduced to a web site, think NY Times, was trying to drum up some business. You don't even have to read the article to know that it's BS.

So here's the "rules" of the trhead. i.e. what I want to happen. Post a headline that pretty much assures the contents will be stupid, but you're not sure in exactly what way. Post the headline without reading the article. Then, if you're inclined to waste some time, go back and see just how stupid it really was. Here's one that tipped me over into starting the thread, from Yahoo News.


Conservative CNN Pundit Says Nikki Haley Baited Trump Into 'A Strategic Mistake'


Yeah right. Wishful thinking, for sure. Nikki has The Donald right where she wants him, right? For eight years, pundits from the left (Yahoo News is pretty left wing, in my experience, have been trumpeting Trump's impending doom, all the while handing him the keys to the White House. This year, he's got the nomination locked up short of death, or something that isn't even on the radar. Conviction won't be enough. Now I'll go and see what the "strategic mistake" was.

ETA: According to the article, he could have just graciously declared victory after New Hampshire, but instead he launched some nasty attacks on Nikki Haley.


Yeah, that never works. It certainly never got him into the White House once. And rattlesnakes should turn vegan.

(To be fair, I do think that's what Nikki should do, because some day he might actually go too far and make a real mistake, but Tuesday night wasn't it.)

[stanky]

I admire the gist of your thread. Have noticed the same; glaringly even.
Problem is, looks like every story (especially in Yahoo news) qualifies.
The main flavor is deception. Of everything. Walk through any mainstream store, and the b.s. nearly leaps off the shelves at you. Hype has replaced quality. Packaging is what has improved. It's become our most important product. And it's exempt.

I like to mess with the algorithm. Pretend to be shopping for something i don't want; watch all the related 'stories' the next day. They appear, with the rest of it, as somehow 'legit'. We're constantly being sold something we don't want...and the loans to buy it.

sigh...that's America.

[Admin]

As the internet takes over the news biz, and the traditional media fall by the wayside, the headlines just get dumber. Providers have figured out that only certain folks read their stories, so they write headlines that will attract the Right Sort of People.

Smart people, like Robert Mercer, use that to their advantage.

There is no escape, sadly. I note that every non-partisan news source (apart from BBC) begs every reader to donate them money, while Murdoch's filth generates enough ad revenue from the stupid to do very nicely.

Who knew truth had a price?

[Meadmaker]

Here's one:

Is it really sixism Trump is showing? Or is it something much worse?


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... f043&ei=47


I admit, I cheated on this one. I read the article before posting.

Seeing the headline and the rather blatant question begging, I assumed I would see an anti-Trump rant that totally missed the point. Instead, I read the article, and I agreed with every word of it. And yet, I still found it incredibly stupid.

The point of the article is that if you take all of the quotes, comments, and general actions of Trump that people call sexist, it's not actually clear that they are really sexist. It might just be that he hates everyone, and if he happens to be talking about a woman he hates, he might use female-specific insults.

The reason I still think it's incredibly stupid is that the author is presenting it as a "Wait.....I just figured out something....."

Well, dumbass, it's about time!

Donald Trump is not sexist. He's not racist. He's not homophobic. He's not transphobic. (Well, ok, he might be a little bit transphobic. He's not very transphobic.) He's just an asshole. He's a narcissist. He's a megalomaniac. He's a vile, nasty, good for nothing, person. He insults everyone who is against Trump.and he doesn't care how.

I wish more journalits understood that, becuase mistaking that for sexism or whatever other deplorable of the day is being talked about helps him in the polls.

[President Bush]

Donald Trump is not sexist. He's not racist. He's not homophobic. He's not transphobic. (Well, ok, he might be a little bit transphobic. He's not very transphobic.) He's just an asshole. He's a narcissist. He's a megalomaniac. He's a vile, nasty, good for nothing, person. He insults everyone who is against Trump.and he doesn't care how.

I suggest the use of e-prime should one want to write and think with fewer judgments.

https://www.asiteaboutnothing.net/w_eprime.html

[stanky]

Here's one:

Is it really sixism Trump is showing? Or is it something much worse?


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... f043&ei=47


I admit, I cheated on this one. I read the article before posting.

Seeing the headline and the rather blatant question begging, I assumed I would see an anti-Trump rant that totally missed the point. Instead, I read the article, and I agreed with every word of it. And yet, I still found it incredibly stupid.

The point of the article is that if you take all of the quotes, comments, and general actions of Trump that people call sexist, it's not actually clear that they are really sexist. It might just be that he hates everyone, and if he happens to be talking about a woman he hates, he might use female-specific insults.

The reason I still think it's incredibly stupid is that the author is presenting it as a "Wait.....I just figured out something....."

Well, dumbass, it's about time!

Donald Trump is not sexist. He's not racist. He's not homophobic. He's not transphobic. (Well, ok, he might be a little bit transphobic. He's not very transphobic.) He's just an asshole. He's a narcissist. He's a megalomaniac. He's a vile, nasty, good for nothing, person. He insults everyone who is against Trump.and he doesn't care how.

I wish more journalits understood that, becuase mistaking that for sexism or whatever other deplorable of the day is being talked about helps him in the polls.

I agree with that; thought i should say so.
What's more is that i feel thus about those whom buy into it.
That is, the problem with 'rule by sociopathy' is that it appeals to the "seed-narcissistic" within the masses. It offers the previously 'forbidden' possibilities of one's life...it begins to reflect the graven image that one chooses to follow.

How to circumvent the nasty collision of icons?
How to worship Christ and Trump?

Hybridize them;. make them synonymous.
That neat trick requires only that you abandon reason and decency; settle in to the wonders of not trying to be better. Eat the hog-slop as if it were the finest gourmet appetizer.

I envy how zen it must be. Imagine...actually following a leader?

As skeptics, of course, we aren't allowed that soothing pablum.

[arthwollipot]

Donald Trump is not sexist.

He is.

He's not racist.

He is.

He's not homophobic.

He is.

He's not transphobic. (Well, ok, he might be a little bit transphobic. He's not very transphobic.)

He is.

He's just an asshole.

He is.

He's a narcissist.

He is.

He's a megalomaniac.

He is.

He's a vile, nasty, good for nothing, person.

He is.

He is all of those things, simultaneously. None of them are mutually exclusive.

He insults everyone who is against Trump.and he doesn't care how.

He is an equal opportunity asshole, but that doesn't mean he isn't also sexist, racist, homophobic and transphobic.

I wish more journalits understood that, becuase mistaking that for sexism or whatever other deplorable of the day is being talked about helps him in the polls.

Yeah, he can label it as "woke" and therefore subject to derision and ridicule.

[Meadmaker]

Here's a suspicious one.

Headline: Transgender People in Florida Risk Having Their Driver's Licenses Revoked.

https://news.google.com/articles/CBMiWW ... id=US%3Aen


I'm going to play by "the rules" this time. I haven't read the article.

Assuming there is a shred of truth to it, I'm guessing that Florida has changed policies related to what goes in the "sex" field on your driver's license. I'm guessing that no licenses will actually be revoked, but there could be something kind of close to truth in it.


And from the same source today (Newsweek)

Outrage as Columbus Day, Veteran's Day, scrapped from Holiday Calendars

https://news.google.com/articles/CBMiUm ... id=US%3Aen


My guess is a university somewhere, but it might be even less significant. Those two holidays are rarely celebrated in the US, although of course Veteran's Day is marked by veterans groups and sanctimonious politicians.

As an aside for you Down Under, General Motors, once America's largest employer, always marked Veteran's Day, but not on the official holiday date of November 11. It was always marked on the first Monday of deer hunting season IN Michigan.

[Meadmaker]

He is an equal opportunity asshole, but that doesn't mean he isn't also sexist, racist, homophobic and transphobic.

I believe the article came to a better explanation for his behavior, but did so very late.


In all seriousness, the accusations against him for those things are what propelled him to the White House the first time, and might get him back again.

[arthwollipot]

Yeah, because not being those things is "woke" and "woke" is the new "commie".